They want to protect us from killer robots.

[walpurgis]

There's worldwide concern about autonomous robotic weapons. Personally, I reckon it's probably much too late to stop that ball from rolling. You can bet that regardless of stated good intentions, every major power and big weapons business will be hard at it developing designs. They are all hypocrites.

http://uk.businessinsider.com/top-artificial-intelligence-companies-plead-for-a-ban-on-killer-robots-2017-8?r=US&IR=T

[Macca]

Will work about as well as the ban on landmines did.

Your robot soldier does not need food, sleep or leave. You don't have to pay it or provide for a pension when you retire it. Nor do its relatives kick up a fuss with the MoD if it gets blown up. You can see the attraction.

However: If sci-fi films have taught us anything it is that killer robots always run amok and turn on their creators.

Double-edged sword.

It's a shame real artificial intelligence is still just some computer geek's wet dream. I think what you are more likely to get is an increase in drone technology. There will be a human controlling the robot soldier but he will be thousands of miles away sat at a desk in a bunker.

[walpurgis]

Maybe they'll have more luck finding charging points than the average electric car driver.

[struth]

Here's a bun pun

https://t01.deviantart.net/baq4TgZXOW9i0sd2ZIhTekMHhUI=/fit-in/700x350/filters:fixed_height(100,100):origin()/pre01/21a4/th/pre/i/2012/331/5/1/exterminate__by_nomokis-d5mcrg8.jpg

[walpurgis]

Neil may have something to say about that. :D

[southall-1998]

Nah, build a real life robocop....He's way more cooler.

S.

[mightymonoped]

This is well worth reading (it's in two parts)...and very, very scary indeed.

https://waitbutwhy.com/2015/01/artificial-intelligence-revolution-1.html

Tony

[Spectral Morn]

Here's a bun pun

https://t01.deviantart.net/baq4TgZXOW9i0sd2ZIhTekMHhUI=/fit-in/700x350/filters:fixed_height(100,100):origin()/pre01/21a4/th/pre/i/2012/331/5/1/exterminate__by_nomokis-d5mcrg8.jpg

Daleks aren't robots. Think of a Dalek as a highly armoured and armed tank, with a horrible, nasty creature at the controls.

Cool buns though :D

[Spectral Morn]

Neil may have something to say about that. :D

Yes, I did... see above.

[struth]

Daleks aren't robots. Think of a Dalek as a highly armoured and armed tank, with a horrible, nasty creature at the controls.

Cool buns though :D

these are special robo dalek buns tho; once eaten the exterminate from within :D

[Macca]

these are special robo dalek buns tho; once eaten the exterminate from within :D

I think that's probably just indigestion.

[southall-1998]

Here's a bun pun

https://t01.deviantart.net/baq4TgZXOW9i0sd2ZIhTekMHhUI=/fit-in/700x350/filters:fixed_height(100,100):origin()/pre01/21a4/th/pre/i/2012/331/5/1/exterminate__by_nomokis-d5mcrg8.jpg


Macca will eat them all for his 6am breakfast ;)

S.

[Macca]

This is well worth reading (it's in two parts)...and very, very scary indeed.

https://waitbutwhy.com/2015/01/artificial-intelligence-revolution-1.html

Tony

He contradicts himself though. First he says that people a lot smarter than us say it is going to happen, later he says that the difference in intelligence between Einstein and the village idiot is next to nothing. He reckons progress is exponential but then admits that 1995 to 2005 saw a lot more progress than 2005 to present. That shouldn't happen with the model he is presenting. There should have been much more progress. We're no closer to proper AI than we were in 1750.

Let's face it they can't even build an operating system that has no glitches; IT at work crashes all the time and that's fairly simple stuff like databases and e-mail. If I was pursued by a killer robot I'd just hide until it had a run time error or lost its internet connection. I'm not that scared.

[struth]

He contradicts himself though. First he says that people a lot smarter than us say it is going to happen, later he says that the difference in intelligence between Einstein and the village idiot is next to nothing. He reckons progress is exponential but then admits that 1995 to 2005 saw a lot more progress than 2005 to present. That shouldn't happen with the model he is presenting. There should have been much more progress. We're no closer to proper AI than we were in 1750.

Let's face it they can't even build an operating system that has no glitches; IT at work crashes all the time and that's fairly simple stuff like databases and e-mail. If I was pursued by a killer robot I'd just hide until it had a run time error or lost its internet connection. I'm not that scared.

you forgot its S shaped increase(that covers everything);)

[Haselsh1]

I think that's probably just indigestion.

:eyebrows:

[Haselsh1]

He contradicts himself though. First he says that people a lot smarter than us say it is going to happen, later he says that the difference in intelligence between Einstein and the village idiot is next to nothing. He reckons progress is exponential but then admits that 1995 to 2005 saw a lot more progress than 2005 to present. That shouldn't happen with the model he is presenting. There should have been much more progress. We're no closer to proper AI than we were in 1750.

Let's face it they can't even build an operating system that has no glitches; IT at work crashes all the time and that's fairly simple stuff like databases and e-mail. If I was pursued by a killer robot I'd just hide until it had a run time error or lost its internet connection. I'm not that scared.

The very first big computer controlled piece of lab equipment I ever used was a prototype reaction calorimeter and it constantly crashed due to watchdog errors. At the time we spent a good deal of time manually integrating areas under curves,
the bloody thing.

This was though back in 1985 and it was controlled by a DEC LSI/11.

[mightymonoped]

He contradicts himself though. First he says that people a lot smarter than us say it is going to happen, later he says that the difference in intelligence between Einstein and the village idiot is next to nothing. He reckons progress is exponential but then admits that 1995 to 2005 saw a lot more progress than 2005 to present. That shouldn't happen with the model he is presenting. There should have been much more progress. We're no closer to proper AI than we were in 1750.

Let's face it they can't even build an operating system that has no glitches; IT at work crashes all the time and that's fairly simple stuff like databases and e-mail. If I was pursued by a killer robot I'd just hide until it had a run time error or lost its internet connection. I'm not that scared.

I admire your self-confidence! ;)

[Macca]

I admire your self-confidence! ;)

Well, I grew up with ZX81s and all that dodgy stuff, and nothing's any better now. If I'm working on a spreadsheet I still save after every change. But you often hear youngsters at work wailing that they have lost an hour's effort because the damn thing has seized up on them and 'autosave' has not done what it says on the tin.

Most IT people are just blagging it, they don't really have a clue. The few who do know their stuff all work for banks, investment houses and the like, making a few hundred grand a year just keeping it all from falling over. They aren't toiling away for peanuts on developing AI at some university research department.

When they can produce a reliable spreadsheet application then we can start worrying about supercomputers taking over the planet.

[Joe]

Back when I worked for a living, I was vaguely associated with university-based IT research. One bright idea that kept re-surfacing was to use 'clusters' of relatively low-powered computers linked together to form one massively powerful computer. The idea never really came to much, and the last time it was tried, some wag dubbed it 'Clusters Last Stand'.